the Practical Farmer .. Vol. 6, #4 Practical Farmers of Iowa Newsletter Winter 1991

WINTER MEETINGS CAP YEAR OF ON-FARM TRIALS AND FIELD DAYS IN THIS ISSUE

It was an eventful year for the PA on-farm trials program: another of 2 Winter Meeting Wrap-Up those wet springs that kept several trials from ever starting, and an August -Gary Huber that burned up crops in the southeast part of the state. But most of the crops 3 Heffernan on Concentration got in and so did 68 replicated on-farm trials, bringing PA's total to 238 in -Ron Rosmann the last five years! 4 Notes and Notices 4 Renew Membership ! Trials covered nitrogen rates, weed management strategies, starter 4 Meetings fertilizers, cover crops, insecticide rates, seeding rates - topics chosen by 27 PA Districts Vanishing Seeds cooperators around the state (see the map below). In addition, these coop­ Midwest Organic erators and three PA "assisting farms" hosted field days and farm tours National Ridge Till whose total attendance approached 1,800 in 1991. Leopold Center 5 Awards and Honors This issue of the Practical Farmer presents the 1991 trial results in full Friend of Exten­ detail, beginning on page 7. In 1991, PA was awarded the National Envi- sion ronmental Achievement Iowa Masters Win PFI 1991 DEMONSTRATION SITES Award from the Renew Good Earth Family America foundation for the 7 1991 On-farm Trial Results on-farm trial program and 7 Reading Numbers cooperation with the Exten­ 7 Corrections sion Service. But replicated 8 Nitrogen trials, as important as they 12 Manure 12 Starter Fertilizers are, aren't the only thing PA 13 Deep Banding members have been up to: 18 Cover Crops 18 Weed Management If you attended one of the 18 Other Trials PRACfiCAL FARMERS OF IOWA field days last summer, you e 27 COOPERATOR FARMS 24 Strip Intercropping • 3 ASSISTING FARMS (Continued on page 2 .) 2 the Practical Farmer may have seen demonstrations of narrow strip intercrop­ ping and intensive rotational ("planned") grazing. These were two of the workshop topics at the PA annual meeting December 9. The following articles give some of the flavor of that event.

A whole new endeavor for PR is agricultural educa­ tion, reported in the last newsletter. So far 69 members and 44 District Commissioners have expressed interest in helping a young person learn about sustainable agriculture.

"Global" issues- PA members are thinking about some of the broader issues related to agriculture. They're looking at "holistic" management approaches, Jerry DeWitt, director of agriculture for the Iowa Coopera· farm forestry, and genetic conservation of heirloom tive Extension Service, was presented the Sustainable crops and livestock breeds. Their activities will be Agriculture Achievement Award by board member Richard Thompson at the December meeting. reported in the spring newsletter.

gave for attending, and what they liked about the These and other themes will develop as 1992 meeting. I will also discuss the suggestions people gave proceeds. Stay in touch with PA. (Have you renewed for improving the annual meeting, as well as their your membership?) It ought to be another interesting recommendations for what PA as an organization year! • should be doing in the future.

Based on the number of unused evaluation forms, WINTER MEETING WRAP-UP we estimate about 140 people attended. Of these, nearly 60 completed and returned evaluations. Informa­ Gary Huber tion from completed evaluations shows that 73 percent PA's annual meeting in December was not my first. of attenders were farmers and 22 percent were attending Some years ago I attended the morning segment of the the meeting for the first time. Thus, there were a high annual meeting while I was a student at Iowa State. I do proportion of farmers at the meeting, and there were a not remember much about that meeting because I was sizable number who were there for the first time. Most said they learned about the meeting from the PA not paying attention very carefully. But at the meeting this last December I paid close attention to what was newsletter, while a smaller portion said they learned happening because, as PFI/Extension education coordi­ about it from newspapers or friends. nator, I am very interested in how PA delivers informa­ .. Two methods were used to determine why people tion to others. What I saw and heard at the meeting attended the meeting. One was an open-ended ques­ impressed me favorably, and it is clear from the com­ tion asking why they attended. The other was a listing ments we received on the meeting's evaluation forms of possible reasons for attending. People rated the that I am not alone in this impression. importance of each reason by circling numbers from 1 to 4, with 1 corresponding to "not at all important" and 4 In this article I will discuss how those attending the annual meeting evaluated the event, who attended the corresponding to ''very important.'' Averaging these numbers allows a determination of the relative impor­ meeting, how they learned about it, the reasons they tance of each reason in the decision to attend. Winter 1991 3

Average scores for reasons to attend HEFFERNAN ADDRESSES WINTER r annual winter meeting (1 =not at all MEETING ON CONCENTRATION important, 4=very important). Ron Rosmann, Harlan Visit with other fanners 3.6 Dr. William ("Bill") Heffernan, chair of the Learn more about how to reduce 3.4 Department of Sociology at the University of Mis­ herbicide use souri-Columbia, was the featured speaker at the Learn more about using tillage to Practical Farmers of Iowa annual winter meeting, 3.2 manage weeds Dec. 9. Heffernan, who was raised near Tripoli, Learn more about cover crops 3.0 Iowa, expressed praise for Practical Farmers of Iowa and enthusiasm for the winter meeting program. Hear Bill Heffernan's presentation 3.0 Learn more about how to reduce Heffernan's presentation centered around the 2.9 nitrogen rates increasing concentration, both in production and Learn more on record keeping and marketing, of most major food items in the U.S. The 2.7 economics data he presented was summarized from a report written by Heffernan and Douglas Constance in May, Learn more about controlled grazing 2.6 1991. Heffernan's sobering message is that fewer and fewer companies are gaining more and more The table above lists these reasons and the average control of the food industry. For example: six scores. The most important reason for attending was to companies now produce 45% of all the broilers in ;isit with other farmers. This finding is supported by the U.S.; 1.4% of the feedlots fed 71% of the cattle numerous responses to the open-ended question, such in 1988; and four packers slaughter 45% of the pork as ''to visit with farmers to get a feel for the direction of PFI,' • ''to speak with others who haue had experiences On a more optimistic note, Heffernan suggested with sustainable agriculture practices, •• and ''to uisit with that it is exactly groups like PH that can offer an friends." Thus, people attended primarily to be able to alternative - a way to not only survive but compete interact with farmers. with such concentration. PA farmers' ability to cut costs, maintain productivity, and approach sustainability are in our favor. In a competitive system, survival depends on efficiency. However, as concentration continues, does the importance of efficiency diminish? Heffernan stated that in an oligopoly (power by the few) or a monopoly (com­ plete power), survival depends on economic and political power, not efficiency.

One of the most disturbing things is the pace at which all this is happening. We are currently wit­ nessing the growth of corporate hog production in Iowa much like that which took place in North Carolina. For instance, the Murphy of Iowa plan to construct 100 contract hog feeding units is proceed-

BlU Heffernan spoke about sustainable agriculture in the (Continued on following page.) changing world economy. 4 the Practical Fanner NOTES AND NOTICES (Heffernan, continued.)

ing on schedule. Thirty-one units are already in Renew PFI Memberships - LAST CALL! production, and another 27 are under consbuction. 1J Annually 250,000 hogs will be finished in these units. The fall membership drive is drawing to a close. Are A 2,400-sow and a 3,400-sow unit are under con­ you "on board" for another year? TI-llS IS YOUR struction in Missouri to supply the finishers in Iowa. LAST PFI NEWSLETTER if you have not renewed your The question has to be asked: "Is this going to membership. You may have been confused by an sustain family-farm agriculture and the economic and indication in the fall renewal letter from PFI that you social well-being of Iowa's communities?'' • owed nothing. That was, in most cases, a big mistake! Check with the PFI coordinators or your district director if you're not sure of your status. Membership costs $10 The open-ended question ''What did you get the per year, but now you can join for three years for $25. most from at this meeting?'' was used to assess what people liked about the meeting. Many of the responses to this question centered on motivation and ideas. For ]JMEETINGS example, some responses were: "inspiration," "re­ dedication and motivation," "support from other PA Southwest District: Potluck and program in mid­ members to keep trying," and "spending time with March. District members will be contacted. people who are interested in trying new things." Other responses were: ''ideas from talking with others in PFI Northwest District: Supper at Stubs Ranch similar situations,'' ''sharing of ideas,'' ''interaction with Kitchen, Spencer, on Sat., Feb 29, 6:30pm. PFI people and new ideas," and "ideas to take home." President Tom Frantzen will show slides of his trip to These are only some of the positive responses, but they Latvia during the coup last year, and other members are are clear evidence that the meeting satisfied both the invited to bring slides, pictures, and experiences to informational and motivational needs of those attending. share. Last year's supper was a big success, drawing nearly 50 people. Quite a number of people responded favorably to the meeting format. Typical responses were ''I really PFI North Central District: Potluck and program Sat., liked the format of concurrent sessions'' and ''it was Feb 22, starting at 11:00 am at the Trinity Lutheran good to have lots of workshops." Others expressed Church, Hampton. From Hwy. 3, take Hwy. 65 to the enthusiasm for particular sessions, such as ''I found "Kum & Go" on the north edge of town, go west 1~ Chief Seattle's message to be very moving," "good talk blocks to the church. Tom Frantzen will speak on his by Bill Heffernan to get 'unhooked· from the system,'' trip to Latvia, and members will discuss the coming year. and ''the addition of economic analysis was a very good Drinks and silverware provided. Bring your spouse and idea." a neighbor. For information, call AI and Laura Hagensick, at 456-2945. An open-ended question on the evaluation form asked how the meeting could have been better. Many PFI Northeast District: 1:00pm, Thursday, March 5, people suggested that more time was needed, especially at North Iowa Community College, in Calmar. Report for discussion during the workshops. Some suggested on a new PFI grazing club that was started after the repeating the workshops more often, and a couple grazing meeting in Calmar this winter. There will also be people even suggested that the meeting be lengthened a report on cooperator trial results from 1991 and to two days. Two others suggested videotaping the discussion of activities for next year, including new work with the Institute for Agricultural Biodiversity on conserv- (Continued on page 26.) Winter 1991 5

ing heritage breeds of livestock. For more information, Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture: call Tom and Irene Frantzen, (515) 364-6426. "Building Bridges: Cooperative Research and Education for Iowa Agriculture." Feb. 18-19, Scheman Center, PFI Southeast District: 1:30pm, Tuesday, Feb. 25, ISU, Ames. General public: one day $40, both days Montgomery Hall, in the Johnson County Fairgrounds, $60. Farmers: one day $30, both days $40. (Includes on the south side of Iowa City, 3149 Old Hwy. 218-S. lunch.) Speakers include: Peter Nowak, rural sociology, PFI members in the district will elect a new district University of Wisconsin; Alfred Blackmer, soil science, director. Forward your nominations to the nominating ISU; Jon Tollefson, entomology, ISU; Roger Ginder, ag committee: Eddie Broders, (319) 785-6022 (evening), economics, ISU; John Ikerd, ag economics, University of -6063 (noon); Wayne Bott, (319) 687-2622; or Dean Missouri- Columbia; Kathleen Merrigan, U.S. Senate Vantiger, (319) 865-7561. Gary Johnson, of Agriculture Committee; William Lockeretz, Tufts Univer­ Hutchinson Farm Management, Geneseo, will discuss sity; Ronald Cantrell, head of ISU Agronomy Depart­ profitable, low-investment hog systems. His firm ment; Tom Frantzen, PFI president; and Dennis Keeney, manages a number of pasture-farrow operations in director of the Leopold Center. For more information Illinois. Peter Jorgensen, of the Institute for Agricultural contact the Leopold Center at (515) 294-3711. Biodiversity, will describe the project to conserve heritage breeds of livestock and how farmers can get involved. For more information, call Jeff and Gayle Olson, (319) 257-6967. Jj AWARDS AND HONORS

Our Vanishing Seed and Agricultural Heritage: Thompsons Receive Monday, Feb. 17, Cornell College, Mount Vernon. The "Friend of Extension" Award symposium begins at 11:00 am, with a talk in King PFI cooperators Richard and Sharon Thompson Chapel by Kent Whealy, of the Seed Savers Exchange. The program ends with Gary Nabham, of Native Seeds/ were recently chosen by Epsilon Sigma Phi, the Exten­ sion Honorary Society, to receive the ''Friend of Exten­ SEARCH, Tucson, Arizona, who will speak at 7:30pm in Hedges Lounge of the Commons on "Conserving sion" award. This award recognizes Iowa citizens who have "contributed to the growth and development of Locally Adapted Seedstocks and Agri-cultural Habitats." For more information, contact Dave Lyon, (319) 895- Iowa communities in cooperation with Extension programs.'' The Thompsons were nominated for the 4375 or -8240. recognition by their Boone County Extension Director, 1992 Upper Midwest Organic Fanning Confer­ David Quinlan. The following text is from the award ence, ''Sustainability - One Farm at a Time.'' March program, held last November, in Ames. 6-7, Marynook College Conference Center, Galesville, Together, Richard and Sharon Thompson have WI. Contact Dave Engel, (608) 734-3711. worked very hard with Iowa State University and Iowa Sixth Annual National Ridge Till Conference. State University Extension to bring sustainable agricul­ Feb. 10-11, Sioux City Convention Center. Registration ture and alternative farming methods to typical farm is $55 ($45 spouses). Speakers include: Larry Neppl, operations in Iowa and around the country. They have Iowa Farms Associates, Fort Dodge; Ernie Behn, Boone; pioneered on-farm research methods for Practical Tom and Irene Frantzen, PA, New Hampton; Doug Farmers and other groups. They helped initiate the Smith, Ontario, Canada; George Rehm, University of Practical Farmers of Iowa organization and were a Minnesota; Randall Reeder, Ohio State University; and driving force in funding a PFI coordinator for Extension. many more. Call (402) 564-3244 for additional infor­ They have hosted many people, including Extension mation. agriculturalists on their farm. Their efforts have had a local, state, and national impact. Dick has cooperated 6 the Practical Farmer

Iowa State University President Martin Jischke (right) and Vic and Cindy Madsen and their sons farm 400 acres near his wife Patty were guests on the farm of Richard and Audubon. Sharon Thompson last fall. "I hope it shows," reflects Vic, "that a person who with state and Central Iowa Area Extension staff to tries to farm sustainably can have excellent yields. We conduct many workshops on cover crops, nitrogen rates, didn't work the soil before planting, and we used the ridge tillage with-and-without-herbicides, and controlled late spring test to fine tune the nitrogen rate.'' Con­ grazing. Dick and Sharon have been 4-H Club leaders gratulations, Vic and Cindy! for 16 years, and Dick currently is serving on the State Extension Advisory Council. They have four children, two of whom are now in farming. PA Members Win National Soil Conservation Award

Congratulations, Dick and Sharon! Merlin and Fay Christensen, Elma, are among three farm couples to receive the nationwide Good Earth Family Award, sponsored by the National Endowment PFI Members Win Iowa Masters Conservation for Soil and Water Conservation and Case IH. In Division in District Seven December, they travelled to Washington, D.C. to accept ''The rains came just right,'' say Vic and Cindy the award. The Endowment, established in 1982, is a Madsen, Audubon, of their 1991 com crop. The field non-profit, non-political, privately funded organization they entered in the Iowa Masters Yield Contest was dedicated to promoting and recognizing innovative measured at just over 204 bushels per acre, winning the stewardship of land and water. conservation division for District 7. The Christensens, who are active in local conserva­ .· After applying about 1,000 gallons of manure in late tion efforts, practice what they preach. They have winter, the Madsens ridge-planted a full-season hybrid in reduced their tillage, installed waterways and a drop 36-inch rows on May 2. The soil is predominantly structure for water, and terraced or changed crop Marshall series, with 5-9% slopes, and it tests very high rotations to include meadow on different fields. A for both potash and phosphate. Thirty pounds of settling structure saves the manure solids from their nitrogen fertilizer went on with the planter. The late 1,000-head feedlot. Drying costs are saved by feeding spring soil nitrate test gave a reading of 18 parts per high moisture com to these cattle, and an evergreen million, so an additional 30 pounds was sidedressed at windbreak around the farmstead has saved on heating cultivation, for a total of 60 pounds purchased nitrogen. bills. Wildlife habitat includes a 30-acre wooded pond.

(Continued on page 26.) Winter 1991 7 PFI COOPERATOR RESULTS, 1991

READING THE NUMBERS, KNOWING THE TERMS

Valid and reliable farmer-generated information is a The farming practices compared in a trial are repeated, cornerstone of Practical Farmers of Iowa. Consequently, or "replicated," at least six times across the field. Thus PFI has worked to develop practical methods that trial results do not depend on a single comparison only, safeguard the accuracy and credibility of that informa­ but on six or more. The order of the practices, or tion. PFI cooperators use methods that allow statistical ''treatments,'' in each pair is chosen with a flip of the analysis of their on-farm trials. Chief among these are: coin. This ''randomization'' is intended to avoid 1) ''replication,'' and 2) ''randomization.'' (See the unintentional bias. PFI on-farm trials have been recog­ figure of a typical PFI trial layout on the following page.) nized for their statistical reliability. So, while PFI coop-

(Continued on next page.)

CORRECTIONS FROM THE WINTER MEETING

If you attended the PFI annual meeting Dec. 9, $15.44, and the$ benefit should be $14.83, not you received a booklet detailing results from all the $26.79. Under this new calculation, the liquid-dry 1991 on-farm trials. As you might expect, the discus­ package was less profitable than the dry fertilizer, sion in the workshops turned up some errors in that which gave a treatment$ benefit of $26.63. How­ report. Here are the corrections. ever, the liquicl!dry package was more profitable than applying no P and K fertilizer at all. Page 8-9: the nitrogen rate trial carried out by Jeff Olson was in corn following soybeans, not corn after Page 20-21: Ted Bauer lost $11.22 by harvesting corn. early. The amount is incorrectly shown as a $11.22 gain. Page 12-13: In Dave Lubben's trial examining the value of Biomix and Pepzyme, that starter combina­ Page 20-21: Seeding costs were not equal in Don tion was $1.81less profitable than no starter, not Davidson's comparison of ridge-till and drilled soy­ $11.00 less profitable. A modest but statistically beans. Including seed costs changes the''$ benefit'' significant yield increase was associated with the of ridge-till from $15.16 to $21.62. Ridge-till costs starter, and including the value of the additional 1. 7 change to $41.84, from $26.64. No-till costs come to bushels leads to the smaller loss figure. $74.34 instead of $52.68.

Page 14-15: Ray Stonecypher, in accordance with Page 23: In the table "Two Farmers' Corn Yields the recommendation of the company that sold him the in Narrow Strip Intercropping,'' some yield numbers foodgrade liquid starter, also banded 24 pounds of were cut off in the second, third, and sixth columns. potash as dry fertilizer. The zero-starter treatment, The yields in column 2 (representing com row #2) however did not apply any potash to the no-starter should read 177 and 227, not 17 and 22. The yields treatment. That increases the ''treatment cost'' and in column 3 (representing corn row #3) should be 171 reduces the relative '' $ benefit'' of the liquid starter and 209, not 17 and 20 bushels, and the yield in treatment. The treatment cost should be $27.41, not column 6 should be 227, not 22 bushels! • 8 the Practical Farmer

A PAIRED-COMPARISON TRIAL ''ab.' ' A third treatment might produce a number with a NARROW STRIPS RUNNING ACROSS THE FIELD "c" (or it might not), and so on. STARTER FERTILIZER COMPARISON ( ...... Cl) Cl) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Q.) Average 1991 statewide prices for inputs were ...... co -CIS -as -as -as -as --as CIS --as as -as -as - assumed in calculating the economics of these trials. (/J (/J (/J rn rn (/J (/J rn rn UJ- - - - rn------rn- - Average fixed and variable costs and time requirements 0 z0 z0 z0 z0 z0 z were also used. These can vary greatly from farm to

1 ..... 117.1 111.0 111.1 111.1 100.7' 110.1 114.1 111.1 111.1 111.7 111.1 farm, of course. The calculations use 1991 harvest time ...... prices of $2.25 per bushel for com, $5.28 for soybeans, and $1.17 for oats.

Parr 1 Parr 2 Parr 3 Patr 4 Parr 5 Parr 6 Some tables show both a " treatment cost" (which includes relevant costs, but not the total cost of produc­ erators don't have all the answers, they do have a tool tion) and ''treatment benefit.'' The treatment benefit is for working toward those answers. the relative advantage of a practice compared to the least profitable treatment in that trial. If there are no When you see the outcome of a PFI trial, you also significant yield differences in the trial, treatment benefit see a statistical indication of how seriously to take those is calculated solely from input costs. If the yield of a results. The following information should help you to treatment is significantly different from that of the least understand the reports of the trials contained in this profitable treatment, then that difference in bushels is document. The symbol"*" shows that there was a also taken into account to calculate treatment benefit for ' 'statistically significant'' difference between treatments, the more profitable practice. or one that probably did not occur just by chance. We require ourselves to be 95% sure before we declare a Dollar amounts shown in parentheses ( ) are significant difference. If, instead of a"*," there is a negative numbers. A treatment ''benefit'' that is a "N. S.," you know the difference was "not significant." negative number indicates a relative Joss. The highest­ yielding practice doesn't always have the greatest There is a handy " yardstick" called the " LSD," or treatment benefit. You will see that sometimes the ' 'least significant difference,'' that can be used in a trial additional input costs of a practice outweigh its greater with only two practices or treatments. If the difference yield. between the two treatments is greater than the LSD, then the difference is significant. You will see in the The results that appear here imply neither endorse­ tables that when the difference between two practices is, ment nor condemnation of any particular product. for example, 5 bushels (or minus 5 bushels, depending Producers are encouraged to carry out their own trials to on the arithmetic), and the LSD is only, say, 3 bushels, find what works in their operations. In reports of trials then there is a"*," indicating the 5 bushel difference is that involve proprietary products, brand names are significant. included for informational purposes.

The LSD doesn't work well in trials with more than two treatments. In those cases, letters are added to NITROGEN show whether results are statistically different from each other. The highest yield or weed count in a trial will 1991 was the fourth year PFI has used the late have a letter "a" beside it. A number with a "b" next spring soil nitrate test for com. The test has been a gOC>C! to it is significantly different from one with an ''a, '' but indicator of nitrogen sidedress needs in both dry years neither is statistically different from a number bearing an Winter 1991 9

and wet. PA cooperators continue to work with ISU soil recommendations: 98lbs N (48 sidedress); 140 lbs N scientist Alfred Blackmer to improve the test. (90 sidedress); and 16Sibs N (115 sidedress). The middle nitrogen rate was based on the formula: The late spring test recommends a range of sidedress rates. (See the chart below.) Through experi­ Yield Goal x 1.21bs N/bushel. ence, growers find where in this "window" their nitro­ gen rates need to be. For most situations, the recom­ The high rate was based on the late spring soil mendations appear to be conservative. For example, nitrate test, which recommended a sidedress of 110-160 the table of nitrogen trials on pages 8-9 shows that pounds N from the soil test value of 10 ppm. The lowest several cooperators ran trials in which it was the high rate was also based on the late spring test, using a nitrogen rate that was based on the test, with the low formula given to PA cooperators during the early stages rate sometimes considerably below the test recommen­ of research on the test: dation. Of these, only Doug Alert's trial and Lynn Stock's trial produced yield reductions from rates below (21 ppm- test result) x 71bs N/ppm. the recommended range. The yields of the two lowest rate treatments were Tom and Irene Frantzen took the late spring test in statistically the same. Unexpectedly, the highest rate of corn following alfalfa. The test value of only 9 ppm N was associated with a significantly greater yield. This (parts per million) nitrate N translated to a sidedress four-to-five bushel increase did not necessarily pay for recommendation of 110-to-160 pounds nitrogen. In a itself, however. Balancing the yield increase against the replicated trial, Tom sidedressed three rates- 0, 50, greater fertilizer cost, the high-rate treatment came out and 110 pounds N. To no one's surprise, all three slightly less profitable than the lowest rate, at least with treatments yielded the same. The late spring test just this year's data. Don plans to repeat the trial. came too early in the season to reflect the nitrate nitro­ gen that was going to be released from that plow-down Ted and Donna Bauer contributed an interesting green manure. Studies have shown corn following observation to the nitrogen discussion. They calculated alfalfa responds to a maximum nitrogen application of the additional cost of handling and hauling from town about 25 pounds per acre. the additional nitrogen fertilizer used in the higher rate of their trials. The additional cost, shown in the nitrogen Don and Sharon Davidson used three application table, comes to the better part of a dollar per acre. That rates to compare two methods for making nitrogen is a cost most people probably don't recognize. (Continued on page 12.)

NITROGEN SIDEDRESS RECOMMENDATION ISU EXTENSION 1991 SCHEDULE

SIDEDRESS RECOMMENDATION IN LBS N/ ACRE 200

150 ...... ~ 100 "'r-...... ,r-- ...... ~ ....., r--... 60 r-...... ~ .....,r--, ~ 0 0 1 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 1112131416161718192021222324262627 NITRATE SOIL TEST READING IN PPM

- LOW END ISU - HIGH END ISU

USING THE LATE SPRING SOIL NITRATE TEST PR cooperators and members examine trial results at the DETERMINE EXACT SIDEDRESS BY YIELD POTENT IAL AND EXPERIENCE December membership meeting. 10 the Practical Farmer

TWO-TREATMENT NITROGEN RATE TRIALS IN CORN

RECOM- LOWRATETRT IDGHRATETRT MENDED

YIELD NRATE YIELD NRATE RATE TEST COOPERATOR LOW HIGH (bu) (lbs N) (bu) (lbs) DIFF. PPM

(AFTER CORN)

BAUER 168.0 66 166.9 125 59 14 70 120 .., .

HOULIHAN 144.4 69 151.1 169 100 20 10 60

MADSEN -: 169.3 147 168.8 192 45 8 llO 160

ROSMANN 127.5 95 129.7 135 40 12 90 140

·.- :- : .·. ··.·. :: .. STOCK 154.2 109 158.6 194 85 7 73 107 : ::)' -:~: . :: .•.•: :·.·i · ·. ,. ..

WILSON 140.6 11 140.2 81 70 27 0 0

(AFTER SOYBEAN)

,., .; :_:: ·::: ' ·.·.·.· •.· : ALERT 134.2 100 141.7 150 so 9 110 160

:-:.. .·•·. •. .

BAUER 164.2 61 165.0 125 64 13 80 130

..· . ·: . <: ·. .· -· -·- - :-··.· .:·.·.··-:- ;:-. ·. .·. .' ... -:- :· OLSON 100.4 45 105.2 130 85 22 0 :::: ::· 40 .. ··.

: .· .-: Winter 1991 11

TWO-TREATMENT NITROGEN RATE TRIALS IN CORN

SIDEDRESS

GAL LEAF LOW DIESEL LOW HIGH TEST YIELD YLD YLD N RATES EQUI- COMMENT RATE RATE RATE DIFF. SIG. LSD SIG. BENEFIT VALENT SAVED

ALSO: S.69 MORE 23 82 82 1.0 N.S. N.S. 2.6 $13.74 14.1 FERT. HANDLING

0 100 0 -6.7 N.S. N.S. 13.1 $23.28 23.8

110 155 BOTH 0.5 N.S. N.S. 3.8 $10.48 10.7 ...

ROOTWORM 50 90 90 -2.2 N.S. N.S. 15.1 $9.31 9.5 DAMAGE INCREASED LSD

SIDEDRESS WAS 0 85 85 -4.4 N.S. * 4.0 $9.62 20.3 2nd ANHYDROUS PASS

NTESTINLOW 0 70 0 0.4 -- N.S. 4.9 $9.14 16.7 RATE = 42 PPM, IN HIGH RATE= 27

LOW RATE WAS 50 100 100 -7.5 N.S. * 6.2 ($5.28) 11.9 BELOW NITRATE TEST ALSO: $.75 MORE 18 82 -0.8 N.S. N.S. 5.9 $14.90 15.3 FERT. HANDLING THREE 0 85 0 -4.8 - N.S. 7.7 $11.09 20.3 REPLICATIONS ONLY t I 12 the Practical Farmer

TRIALS USING MANURE ,....- PURCHASED MANURE TREATMENT INPUTTRT

NCONTENT N PREVIOUS LEAF s COOPERATOR (MANURE+ AVAIL- YIELD NRATE INPUT TYPE CROP N COST FERTILIZER) ABLE (bu.) (%)

. .. ::::: :::·· 28%, N · :·· REICHERTS OATS l'ii=<'it so 2.S 2.7 180.9 $20.93 69 : . SIDEJ>RESSED

28%NAND SVOBODA CORN 133 112 2.0 1SS.S $37.72 121 STARTER

MANURE STARTER FERTILIZERS

The table of manure trials above shows two trials Two-Treatment Trials comparing manure to purchased nitrogen. In neither the Reicherts trial nor the Svoboda trial was there a signifi­ Starter fertilizers were a popular subject of trials in Of nine with-and-without trials, two found a cant yield difference. In the trial on the farm of Mike 1991. and Jamie Reicherts, there was considerably more N significant yield increase and one a significant yield decrease with starters, and six trials found no significant available to the crop in the purchased-N treatment (69 yield difference. (See the table on pages 12-13.) Jerry pounds) than in the strips receiving the mid-season manure sidedressing (25 pounds estimated). The late and Jill Carlson found a 3.8 bushel higher yield with a spring soil nitrate test recommended 80-to-130 pounds urea-calcium chloride starter. Research at Texas A&M of sidedressed N, but apparently the crop had enough University indicates this nutrient mix can be of value, at nitrogen in either system. Dick and Mary Jane Svoboda least under cool conditions. Dave and Lisa Lubben recorded a 1. 7 bushel greater yield in soybeans using supplemented manure with purchased nitrogen in their trial. That system yielded enzyme and micronutrient products manufactured by as well as did com with Tainio Technique and Technology. In neither of these all N purchased, and its two trials did the starters pay, however. Balanced nitrogen cost about the against the cost of the products, the starter treatments same. Although it is lost an estimated $2.21 and $11.00 per acre, respec­ not reflected in the tively, in the Carlson and Lubben trials. $ benefit calculations, Dave Lubben reported a significant yield decrease the manure treatment also received an addi­ using a starter-foliar combination of products recom­ mended by a consultant and sold by TransNational tional $14.07-worth in AGronomy, Ltd. Dave reports the foliar spray was potash and phosphate applied about two weeks late, due to delayed shipping, from the livestock and thinks that it may have caused leaf bum. Lubben manure. also ran two trials using the fertilizer additive ACA (zinc Winter 1991 13

TRIALS USING MANURE PURCHASED DIFFERENCE INPUTTRT

LEAF RATE YIELD MANURE YIELD $ YLD. YLD. LEAFN N DIFF DIFF. $ COMMENTS (bu.) COST SIG. LSD SIG. (%) (lbs) (bu.) BENEFIT

LATE-SPRING TEST: 2.8 181.2 $29.97 -44 -0.3 N.S. 7.1 N.S. $9.05 APPLY 80-130LB N

NOT VALUED: $14.07 1.9 156.9 $37.69 -9 -1.4 N.S. 9.9 N.S. ($0.03) MANUREP&K

acetate). ACA has increased corn nitrogen uptake in visible. Some producers consider starters worthwhile some private and university experiments, but the just for the early competition with weeds and the earlier response is hard to predict. There was no yield effect in cultivation they may allow. Others expect no yield either of Dave's trials with ACA. response - they simply use starters as a way to apply maintenance levels of nutrients. These different strate­ Three-Treatment Starter Trials gies require different financial calculations as well as a few value judgments. A number of cooperators compared starter rates or different products with a zero-rate check in three­ treatment trials, shown in the table on pages 16-17. PHOSPHORUS AND POTASSIUM With no significant yield differences, the zero-starter AND DEEP BANDING check won financially in Mark and Rita Mays' trial, in Dick and Sharon Thompson's trial of corn-following­ Following on university research that shows banding hay, and (for the third year) in Steve and Gloria Leazer's to be the most efficient method of fertilization in ridge starter trial. Conventional fertilizers topped both the tillage, PFI cooperators have compared banding and checks and alternative fertility materials in other trials by broadcasting on their own farms. Two trials this year Lubben and Thompson. In the three-treatment trial yielded inconclusive results. Paul and Karen Mugge conducted by Ray and Marj Stonecypher, conventional compared a fall band in the ridge with spring broadcast. dry fertilizer and dry-plus-low-salt liquid fertilizer both Harlan and Sharon Grau compared a fall band in the yielded significantly more than the zero-starter check ridge with fall broadcast. Although neither trial gave a treatment. yield difference, Harlan Grau observed an early season starter effect from the fall band. The addition of a zero­ Are Starters for You? rate check treatment will benefit future trials.

The popularity of starter fertilizers is helped by Jeff and Gayle Olson compared two sources of observable yield responses on some farms and in some phosphorus for corn, diammonium phosphate (DAP) years. Even in trials that show no yield increase, starter effects such as faster early growth and silking are often (Continued on page 18.) 14 the Practical Farmer

OTHER FERTILITY TRIALS

TREATMENT "A" TREATMENT "B" YIELD COOPERATOR DESCRIPTION YIELD (bu.) OATS-30LBS FRANTZEN 54.0 OATS-NON 53.2 PREPLANTN

FALL BAND IN RIDGE FALL BROADCAST GRAU · 137.9 132.3 (13+32+66), HARROW (13+32+66) FALL DEEP BAND SPRING BROADCAST MUGGE 101.2 98.3 (30+80+90) (30+80+90)

STARTER-SOYBEANS ALERT 36.9 NO STARTER 36.8 (12+30+30) STARTER- CORN ALERT 138.3 NO STARTER 135.2 (20+20+30+2S+1ZN) STARTER FOR CORN-- CARLSON 86.6 NO STARTER 82.8 (UREAN+Ca) 1 LBBIOMIX, LUBBEN 51.7 NO STARTER 50.0 8 OZ PEPZYME (TT&T) (4+13+2) STARTER LUBBEN 97.0 NO STARTER OR ACA 99.3 +ACA--CORN 60 LBS PREPLANT N 60 LBS PREPLANT N LUBBEN 146.2 147.9 +ACA ALONE

·;•o· :-:···~: .··. ALTERNATIVE LUBBEN 47.6 NO FERTILIZER 50.9 FERTILIZERS (TNA) (7+21+7) STARTER MADSEN 163.6 NO STARTER 158.7 --CORN (0+0+51) STARTER, OLSON 57.0 NO STARTER 56.5 DEEP BANDED (1+6+6) STARTER SVOBODA 141.7 NO STARTER 144.5 --CORN Winter 1991 15

OTHER FERTILITY TRIALS

DIFFERENCE YIELD $BENEFIT YLD SIG. YLDLSD COMMENTS (bu.) OF"A" 30 LBS N PREPLANT, 15 LBS 0.8 N.S. 1.3 ($10.48) FOLIAR. POOR OAT YEAR

:;:;( BAND APPEAaEDTO HELP EARLY 5.6 N~S. 8.2 ($2.75) ; << GROWTH, BUT LARGE LSD ) ·. . ;:· /

2.9 N.S. 6.1 ($2.43)

···.• ··,. ,, ... ::· ~- . : .,-·· ,'= =:'·''=::::=::r::::;r .· ·.· ·:· : . .·. 0.1 N.S. ,•,· 1.2 ($21.30) ·: ....· . :-:·=: : .···: : CROP RECEIVED AN ADDffiONAL 3.2 N.S. 8.4 ($18.23) 30 LBS NAT PLANTING :: : :/ 3.8 :3.2 ($2.28) COST EXCEEDED YIELD INCRE.ASE * ;:;. ;: ·.· •.· :::: .. ' :::::::. . " 1.7 * 1.6 ($1.81) ..

:-. STARTER COST $4.55, <· : ·=· •. .·.. ~2.3 .; N.S. 9.7 .•:· ($7.57) .. r.·-:: ACA COST $2.15 ~-· ·=··· I •:

-1.7 N.S. 4.0 ($4.56) f MICRONUTRIENTS & NATURAL -3.2 * 2.0 ($30.92) ' FERTILIZER-- STARTER & FOLIAR BOTHTRTS: 45LBSN AT 4.9 N.S. 6.5 ($8.60) PLANTING, 45 LBS SIDEDRESS

. :-:

0.5 N.S. 9.3 ($6.59) ... :-: .·. :

BOTH TRTS: 100 LBS K20 -2.8 N.S. 7.9 ($8.25) PREPLANT, 90 LBS N SIDEDRESS 16 the Practical Fanner

MULTIPLE-TREATMENT TRIALS

TREATMENT "A"

YIELD PREVIOUS YIELD TRT COOPERATOR CROP SIGNIFI- DESCRIPTION STAT. s CROP (bu.) COSTS BENEFIT CANCE

NOROOTWORM LEAZER CORN CORN • 106.6 b $0.00 $14.40 CONTROL • •

NOROOTWORM STRIEGEL CORN CORN 108.3 b $0.00 $6.75 ... • CONTROL

NO STARTER LEAZER CORN CORN N.S. 102.2 a $0.00 $38.50 FERTIUZER

NO STARTER LUBBEN CORN SOYBEANS 135.2 ab $0.00 $10.00 • FERTILIZER

., :·:=::::

NO STARTER CORN SOYBEANS N.S. 131.3 a $0.00 $38.50 MAYS FERTILIZER

NO STARTER STONECYPHER CORN SOYBEANS 112.0 b $0.00 $0.00 • FERTILIZER

NO STARTER SOYBEANS CORN 49.2 $0.00 $41.92 THOMPSON • FERTILIZER b

NO STARTER THOMPSON CORN HAY N.S. 110.9 a $0.00 $41.92 FERTILIZER

NO STARTER THOMPSON SOYBEANS N.S. 121.7 a $0.00 $23.24 CORN FERTILIZER

NOADDEDP, OLSON CORN CORN N.S. 104.6 a $15.36 $10.87 N ADJUSTED

98LBSN .. DAVIDSON CORN SOYBEANS 144.6 b $22.69 $9.78 • • (48 LB SIDEDRESS)

,,.

3LBSN FRANTZEN CORN ALFALFA N.S. 170.4 a $7.00 $25.61 (0 SIDEDRESS)

92LBS N STONECYPHER CORN SOYBEANS N.S. 124.6 a $40.25 $13.97 (60 LB SIDEDRESS) Winter 1991 17

MULTIPLE-TREATMENT TRIALS

TREATMENT ''B'' TREATMENT"C"

YIELD TRT YIELD TRT OVERALL DESCRIPTION STAT. s DESCRIPTION STAT. s (bu.) COSTS BENEFIT {bu.) COSTS BENEFIT COMMENTS

ROOT INSECTICIDE STIMULANT 107.4 b $14.40 $0.00 114.2 a $10.50 $19.97 (COUNTER) (BIOROOT+)

HALF-RATE FULL RATE USED CONRAD LORSBAN, 4.5 107.1 b $6.75 $0.00 LORSBAN, 114.6 a $13.50 $8.90 BANDERS LBS 9LBS

-~ •' :::- ·:· :· ···::·· .. ·=· ::::: .. ZERORAT.E 250LBS ·• SHOWED lliGHER IOOLBS $13.95 $24.55 $38.50 (S-23-23) 103.1 a (15-9-2-17S 101.8 a so.oo LEAF TISSUE cu & +MICRO) Zn THAN OTHER RATES BIOMIX& PEPZYME S GAL (7-23-S) 136.3 a $5.42 $12.41 I LBBIOMIX, 132.8 b $10.00 $0.00 60ZPEPZYME MANUFACTURED BYTT&T ... ·:·::· IDGHRATE SHOWED IDGHER ·.· ...•.·: ISOLBS 2SOLBS 132.3 a $23.10 $15.40 132.4 $38.50 $0.00 LEAF TISSUE S & (15-9-2-17S+MI (IS-9-2-17S+MI a :···:· MnTHANZERO :.. RATE TRTC:FOOD LIQUID DRY STARTER GRADE LIQUID, 130.6 a $15.60 $26.63 (+1+8+8 +S Zn) 131.0 a $27.41 $14.83 (7+18+48) CHELA TED Zn, 38 & (0+0+23) DRY LBS KCI PREPLANT .. <·: LIQUID FERT.

:= LIQUID STRIPS HAD (0+0+60)AS 51.2 a $7.75 $43.47 49.6 b $41.92 $0.00 STARTER STARTER SIGNI.FlCANTLY (8+18+17) MORE WEEDS IN THE ROW LEAF TISSUE IN (40+0+60) LIQUID (40+0+60) SHOWED FROM28%N& 112.9 a $16.83 $25.09 STARTER 113.0 a $41.92 $0.00 SIG. GREATER K, KCI (8+18+17) LESSCa& Mg ...... NO SIGNIFICANT 26+18+60 56+18+60 DIFFERENCES IN STARTER 122.0 a $16.26 $6.98 STARTER 124.1 a $23.24 so.oo LEAF TISSUE FERTILIZER FERTILIZER NUTRIENTS THEORY: MAP PIS PFROMDAP,N 107.4 a $25.00 $1.23 PFROMMAP, 106.5 a $26.24 $0.00 MORE AVAILABLE ADJUSTED NADJUSTED THAN DAP P. (N EQUALIZED)

HIGH RATE YIELD WAS 140LBSN(90 165 LBS N (115 145.1 b $32.47 $0.00 149.6 a $38.29 $4.86 SIGNIFICANTLY SIDEDRESS) SIDEDRESS) GREATER THAN .... . LOW&MIDDLE LATE SPRING 53 LBS N (50 113 LRS N (110 NITRATE TEST 9 173.5 a $19.80 $12.80 161.7 $32.61 $0.00 PPM. SIDEDRESS) SIDEDRESS) a RECOMMEND ATIO 110-160 LBS N

LATE SPRING TEST 122 LllS N (90 152 LBS N (120 13 PPM: 80-130 LBS 123.9 $47.24 $6.98 123.4 $54.22 $0.00 SIDEDRESS) a SIDEDRESS) a N SIDEDRESS RECOMMENDED 18 the Practical Farmer and monoammonium phosphate (MAP). Jeff had heard single strategy. Weed numbers did not seem to relate to that the phosphorus in MAP is more available. How­ yields in this experiment, but weeds were few overall. ever, neither treatment yielded significantly more than the zero-rate check. WEED MANAGEMENT TRIALS

COVER CROPS In the past five years PR cooperators have compiled an impressive record showing that ridge tillage can be Richard and Sharon Thompson devoted a major used to raise crops profitably without herbicides. Even effort in 1991 to the study of cover crops for weed in the wet growing season of 1990, only one of eleven control. (See the table on the opposite page.) Previous trials in ridge-till showed a reduction in yield when trials by the Thompsons and other cooperators have chemical control was not used. The wet spring of 1991 pursued cost reduction, weed control, and managing the presented an even greater challenge, and cooperators cover crop to limit competition with other crops. Dick adopted a variety of strategies to cope. These included: Thompson put all these lessons together, seeding just 18 1) use of a preplant contact herbicide, with mechanical pounds of rye per acre in two rows just on the ridge. control thereafter; 2) planting into a "green" field of With this practice cost is limited, the cover is located weeds, relying on those weeds to suppress later weeds where it gives the most erosion control and is easiest to and on a well-adjusted planter to clean the row zone; 3) eliminate, and the rye is tough on weeds. This weed use of those mechanical methods followed by a control can come both through the rye's competitiveness postemergence herbicide when the situation demanded. and through the "allelopathic" effect (perhaps chemi­ cal) it has on other plants. The table on pages 20-21 shows at least one ex­ ample of each of these strategies. If there was a lesson In a cropping system without herbicides, Dick to be drawn from this year, it may have been the Thompson compared the effect of two factors - cover importance of timeliness of the postemergence applica­ crop and rotary hoeing - on crop yield and weed tion. Three trials in soybeans produced yield reductions numbers. The "cover crop" was either the seeded rye because the foxtail and its friends got ahead of the crop or the natural cover of spring weeds, which, with the late before the postemerge herbicide went on. This class of planting, were abundant. Dick was most concerned with herbicides gives farmers a "safety net," but like most the effect of the practices on weeds in the row, but he techniques their use requires good timing. also counted weeds out of the row. As the table shows, weed numbers were very low overall. In the trial at site 9, the rye cover was more effective in reducing total OTHER TRIALS OF INTEREST weeds than was the weed cover, but in the trial at site .. 1-N the reverse was true. Hoeing reduced the total Rootworm control number of weeds in all three of the factorial trials, but Jim and Vickie Striegel compared rates of rootworm hoeing did not change the number of weeds in the row. . insecticide. (Table pages 16-17.) They used the shop­ ' In a year with a normal planting season, weed cover crafted banders manufactured by their neighbor, Larry would not be so developed at planting time, offering a Conrad, which are supposed to give more even distribu­ greater contrast between the rye cover and the volunteer tion of material across the row than other banders. weed cover. Scouting in 1990 had shown a high number of adult beetles, and the hope was that the banders would allow A fourth trial pitted cover crops against two other Striegel to use a half-rate of insecticide. Nevertheless, weed control strategies: herbicide and rotary hoeing. Each of the three treatments in this trial relied on only a (Continued on page 24.) Winter 1991 19

j COVER CROPPING TRIALS COOPERATOR: THOMPSON

COVER: RYE RYE WEED WEED COVER HOE

SITE CROP HOE: YES NO YES NO EFFECf EFFECf

3-E SOYBEANS YIELD (bu.): 53.6 a (SAME) 53.1 a (SAME) N.S. -

FALL SEEDED RYE TRTCOST: $20.43 $11.15 . $9.28 $0.00

TRT BENEFIT: so.oo $9.28 $11.15 $20.43

WEEDS IN ROW: 14 a 15 a 14 a 19 a N.S. N.S.

WEED OFF ROW: 48 ab 28 b 55 a 41 ab N;S. * TOTAL WEEDS: 62 ab 43 b 69 a 60 ab N.S. * 9 SOYBEANS YIELD (bu.): 55.9 a 54.8 b 56.4 a 56.0 a * *

SPRING SEEDED RYE TRTCOST: $20AJ $11.15 $9.28 $0.00

·.; TRT BENEFIT: $0.00 $3.78 $11.15 $20.43

WEEDS IN ROW: 1 b 2 ab 3 ab 5 a N.S. N.S.

WEED OFF ROW: 9 b 12 b 13 b 20 a t ,;.,, *

TOTAL WEEDS: 10 c 15 be 16 b 25 a :·: * * 1-N CORN YIELD (bu.): 115.0 a 114.9 a 110.3 b 110.2 b * N.S.

SPRING SEEDED RYE TRTCOST: $14.25 $5.89 $3.09 $0.00

TRT BENEFIT: ($0.51) $7.68 $0.00 $3.09

TOTAL WEEDS: 187 c 842 a 77 c 511 b * * , :

RYE HERBI- ROTARY TRT: COVER CIDE HOE

3-W SOYBEANS YIELD (bu.): 51.7 b 50.5 c 53.0 a

SPRING SEEDED RYE TRTCOST: $11.15 $7.77 $9.28

TRT BENEFIT: $3.03 $0.00 $12.01

WEEDS IN ROW: 42 a 3 b 9 b (ALL WEED NUMBERS ARE WEED OFF ROW: 20 b 19 b 38 a PER ACRE.) TOTAL WEEDS: 61 a 23 b 47 ab 20 the Practical Fanner

I WEED TRIALS TABLE -

LOW RATE TREATMENT IDGHRATETRT COOPER- ATOR BROADLEAFED OTHER WEED DESCRIPTION YIELD DESCRIPTION WEEDS/ACRE INFORMATION

(CORN)

NO HERBICIDE, WET SPRING- EXTRA 8 LBS LASSO II DAVIDSON 124.4 906 ROTARY HOE 3X HOEING INI2" BAND

MECHANICAL, MECHANICAL, POST HOULDIAN 120.7 HOED 1 X, CULT. 2 X POST BROADCAST - BAND

NO HERBICIDE, PREPLANT, PLANT, AND MUGGE 141.1 0 I EXTRA HOE POST BANDS

NO HERBI OD E OR PREIPOSTEMERGE, SVOBODA 178.0 HOE, 2 CULTIVATIONS - CULTIVATION

DOUBLE PASS ON SINGLE PASSON THOMPSON 124.0 178 POSTEMERGE HOE POSTEMERGE HOE

(SOYBEANS)

HEAVIER GRASS MAYS NO HERBICIDE 43.0 1,073 BANDED HERBICIDE PRESSURE ALSO

POST EMERGE, SIG. HIGHER GRASS PRFJPOSTEMERGE & DORDT 45.8 2,718 MEC HANICAL PRESSURE MECHANIC AL

SIG. HIGHER GRASS PLANTING AND POST MUGGE POSTEMERGE 52.5 0 PRESSURE BANDS

POSTEMERGE, SIG. HIGHER GRASS PRFJAT-PLANTING OLSON 37.0 19 MECHANICAL PRESSURE HERBICIDES

MECHANICAL WEED IlEA VIER GRASS POSTEMERGE, ROSMANN 41.4 1,401 MANAGEMENT ONLY PRESSURE ALSO MECHANICAL

BURNDOWN HERBIC IDE, BURNOOWN, WILSON 55 32 NO G RASS PRESSURE PREEMERGE HERB., MECHANICAL MEC HANICAL Winter 1991 21

~'"") WEED TRIALS TABLE

IDGH RATE TREATMENT TREATMENT DIFFERENCES

OTHER WEED BROAD YIELD YLD. YLD. WEED LOW RATE YIELD INFORMA- COMMENTS WEEDS DIFF. SIG. LSD SIG. $BENEFIT TION

,, SIGNIFJCANTL Y GREATER . ··:. 121.5 941 .; 2.9 N.S. 18.3 N.S. (SO.ll) GRASS PRESSURE IN NO HERB. ..

HOED I X, POOR GRASS CONTROL IN 122.9 -2.2 N.S. 10.0 $14.93 - CULT. 2X - BOTH TREATMENTS

138.6 0 2.6 N.S. 3.9 N.S. $6.63

GOOD RAINFALL 167.2 10.8 7.7 $12.76 - * - THROUGHOUT SEASON

.· 122.3 301 1.7 N.S. 3.4 * ($3.09) NO HERBICIDES USED •.• .. : ·:::;:~ :::;.. :-: .

45.9 623 -3.0 * 2.0 * ($7.57)

CUSTOM HOEING AND 51.6 955 -5.8 * 1.3 * ($28.38) CULTIVATION WERE BOTH LATE

52.9 0 -0.4 N.S. 3.0 N.S. $2.85

POSTEMERGE APPLIED TOO 49.3 4 -12.3 8.0 N.S. ($69.02) * LATE TO SAVE YIELDS

ONLY 1 HOEING, WEEDS 46.6 778 -5.1 * 3.1 N.S. ($13.67) COUNTED ONLY IN 3 STRIP PAIRS

NO GRASS 55 2 0 $11.49 POOR MONITOR P RECISION PRESSURE - - * 22 the Practical Farmer

OTHER TRIALS

TREATMENT ''A'' TREATMENT ''B'' COOPER- ATOR YIELD CROP DESCRIPTION DESCRIPTION (bu.)

BAUER CORN HARVESTONOCTOBER3 161.4 HARVEST ON 0CfOBER23

MULTILEAF, (TRIPPER STANDARD V AR OORDT ALFALFA 3.6T NURSE CROP) (WI1H TRIPPER)

PURCHASED SEED (VAR REIOIERTS OATS BIN-RUN OATS (VAR. DON) 29.4 DON)

BIN-RUN BEANS REICHERTS SOYBEAN 45.6 PURCHASED SEED (3033) (RIVERSIDE 3033)

1HOMPSON CORN 30,000 PLANTS/ACRE 127.8 27,000 PLANTS/ACRE

NARROW SlRIPS, CROP BLOCKS, CONVEN- 1HOMPSON CORN 141.0 RIDGE-TILL TIONALTILL

NARROW SlRIPS, CROP BLOCKS, CONVEN- 1HOMPSON SOYBEAN 47.5 RIDGE-TILL TIONALTILL ·.

''AROUSE" MICROBIAL CARLSON CORN 93.5 NO SEED TREA1MENT SEEDTRT

"BIOROOT+" ROOT MAYS SOYBEAN 54.8 NO ROOT STIMULANT STIMULANT

RIDGE-m.L. BURNDOWN, NO-TILL. BURNDOWN, DAVIDSON SOYBEAN 38.6 2 CULTIVATIONS 2POSTEMERGESPRAYS Winter 1991 23

) OTHER TRIALS

1RT DIFFERENCE "B"

YIELD YIELD YLD YLD $BENEFIT OF COMMENT (bu.) DIFF. ISD SIG. TRT"A"

5.7% MOISTURE DIFFERENCE 157.7 3.7 6.3 N.S. ($11.22) SAVED DRYING, HAULING

SAME SEED COST, CRUDE 3.8 -0.2 0.4 N.S. $0.00 PROTEIN, & REI... FOOD VAL. .. ..

4.25 BU/ACRE SEEDING, COST OF 25.6 3.9 4.5 N.S. $3.19 BIN-RUN INCLUDES CLEANING 1. 74 BU/ACRE SEEDING, COST OF 46.0 -0.4 0.9 N.S. $7.83 BIN-RUN INCLUDES CLEANING

124.2 3.6 2.7 * $5.48 OVERALL ALTERNATIVE SYSTEM 120.1 21.0 7.7 $72.97 * BENEFIT: $24.23

(BECAUSE OATS IN ALTERNATIVE .· ., 49.7 -2.1 )\: 4.4 N.S. $39.89 ... SYSTEM LOST MONEY)

91.2 2.2 3.0 N.S. ($13.65)

56.3 -1.5 3.9 N.S. ($7.20)

RIDGE-TllL COSTS: $41.84, 40.6 -2.1 1.7 $21.62 * NO-TILL COSTS: $74.34 24 the Practical Farmer the corn receiving the full rate of Lorsban yielded better than both the control and the half-rate treatments in this trial.

Steve and Gloria Leazer compared rootworm insecticide to an alternative root stimulant, Bioroot Plus. (Table pages 16-17.) Corn treated with insecticide yielded significantly better than both the zero-rate check treatment corn and the corn treated with the biological root stimulant. The same root stimulant was applied to soybeans with no observable effect by Mark and Rita Mays. By late summer the multlleaf characteristic was becoming evident in the Dordt College trial.

Seeds and Seeding No-till and Ridge-till

Mike and Jamie Reicherts evaluated the economics Don and Sharon Davidson carried out a trial to of using bin-run oats and soybeans instead of purchased answer the question they often hear about the relative seed. The farm-grown seed made them money in both merits of ridge tillage and no-till. No-tilled soybeans can cases. Dick and Sharon Thompson obtained a signifi­ be seeded close with a drill, leaving little space between cantly greater corn yield with a population of 30,000 plants. In theory, this allows the crop to use more of the plants per acre than with 27,000. (Results on pages 22- available sunlight earlier in the season than soybeans 23.) planted in 30-inch or 36-inch rows, and the no-till residue cover conserves soil moisture. The results from the trial, shown on pages 22-23, indicate that the no-till Harvest Date soybeans did indeed yield 2.1 bushels per acre better than the ridge-till soybeans, a statistically significant Ted and Donna Bauer performed a simple experi­ difference. But the no-till system also required two ment to compare corn harvest dates three weeks apart. separate postemergence herbicide applications and a The good drying weather in October allowed them to higher seeding rate, and its cost outweighed the eco­ save more than $11 per acre in grain hauling and nomic benefit of the higher yield. Don hopes to con­ drying. (Table pages 22-23.) tinue this comparison for several more years.

-. Multileaf Alfalfa NARROW STRIP INTERCROPPING

Dordt College compared a multileaf alfalfa variety to PFI cooperators have continued to work with Iowa a standard alfalfa variety. The multileaf has more leaf State University researchers on the practice of narrow for the same amount of stem, and so should produce a strip intercropping. In narrow strip intercropping, higher quality hay. Ron Vas at the College measured alternating strips of different crops run side by side yield, crude protein, and relative feed value. He did not across the field. In addition to giving erosion control find differences clearly attributable to variety, but the and rotation benefits, the practice can achieve overall multileaf characteristic should be expressed more yield increases when crops in the borders of the strips strongly as the stand matures next year. (Table on use sunlight and moisture in complementary ways. If pages 22-23.) Winter 1991 25 everything goes right, this overall benefit can amount to However, the yields themselves are not at all bad, as "\ slight loss in soybean yields and a definite increase in shown in the table. ,Orn yields.

TWO FARMERS' CORN YIELDS IN NARROW STRIP Paul and Karen Mugge, of Sutherland, have at­ INTERCROPPING tempted to compare crops grown in strips to solid blocks -BUSHELS-- of the same crops. Paul's carefully designed trial fell (ROWl victim to the high winds that cut across northern Iowa in FARTIIEST 180 177 171 166 FRANTZEN, 4-37" July. His stripping trial became somewhat of a lodging FROM LAST experiment. Nevertheless, he recorded the following 227 REI CHERTS, YEAR'S 258 209 217 211 227 6-30" yields. CORN ROW:) 1 2 3 4 5 6 ROW NUMBER

COOPERATOR: PAUL MUGGE Cruse's associates are also gathering useful informa­ tion on the growth of oats on the permanent ridges of YIELDS (bu.) these stripping systems. The following oat yields were taken at different locations relative to the ridge. CORN OATS SOYBEANS

STRIPPED: 69.3 52.5 58.3 RIDGE SYSTEM OAT YIELDS-- FRANTZEN FARM BLOCKED: 55.5 55.5 48.0 YIELD (BU.) LOCATION 58 UNTRACKED VALLEY Interestingly, soybeans appeared to yield as well in strips as they did in solid blocks this year. (The solid 67 SHOULDER OF RIDGE block soybean yield shown is based on only one com­ RIDGETOP bine swath, however.) 95 37 WHEEL-TRACKED VALLEY In strips, corn takes advantage of the border condi­ tions. Yields are typically higher along strip edges than in the interior rows of a strip. However, this year researchers saw something in Mike Rei cherts' fields that made them wonder if there might be a drawback to the practice of strip cropping. There were telltale signs of rootworm activity in the rows of corn next to what had been last year's corn strips.

While rootworm migration has the potential to eat into the profitability of narrow strip intercropping, Corn yields collected by ISU soil scientist Richard Cruse on two PFI farms are encouraging. Cruse and his col- agues found a tendency for more root damage and less ...Neryielding in the row next to the previous year's corn. In Reicherts' 1991 trial, despite lodging in the row next to the previous year's corn, the yield there was greater than in the center of the strip. 26 the Practical Farmer (Good Earth Award, continued from page 6.) The yields shown for the ridge-top location are high, The Christensens credit the crop scouting obtained especially for a poor oat year. The " weak link" is through the Integrated Crop Management Program with clearly the valleys between the ridges, and especially the cutting their fertilizer and herbicide bills 30-50 percent. wheel-tracked valleys. If farmers and researchers could discover how to improve the growing environment in The Christensens have been members of Practical these zones, oat yields could be increased. • Farmers of Iowa for three years. They are also active in Pheasants Forever, Howard County Pork Producers, the Howard County and National Cattlemen's Associations, and local civic and religious activities. Congratulations on this well-deserved recognition! •

(Meeting Wrap-up, continued from page 4.) sessions so that tapes would be available to people who gested "getting Dr. Blackmer on the program to talk could not attend a particular session, and another about his work with P and K,'' while another person suggested putting transcripts of the discussions in the PFI advised "adding a workshop on equipment ideas and newsletter. One person said that some of the workshops modifications.'' Someone mentioned that it would be had too many presenters. good to have coffee and donuts right away during registration, and another person said that the chairs So while people generally liked the workshop during the general session should be faced the other format, there was some frustration that too much was direction so that ' 'latecomers can sneak in.'' happening in too short a time. Suggestions for improv­ ing this situation centered around increasing the time Another open-ended question on the evaluation allotted or coming up with alternative forms for the form asked what PFI should be doing as an organization. information, such as videotapes or transcripts. Many of the comments were simply to ''keep on doing what you are doing'' and ''do more of the same.'' There were a variety of suggestions for improve­ Many others suggested that PFI should expand its ments beyond those relating to time constraints. Two education efforts. Typical comments were "try to reach similar suggestions were ''lessen the emphasis on ridge out to more farmers,'' ''proceed on the present course tillage" and "look at more tillage choices, like disking while striving to reach a wider audience, '' and ''get and fteld cultivation.'' Thus, there was a desire among more information and test results out to the public.'' some to increase the diversity of the on-farm trials to Thus, an important segment of those attending want PFI include a variety of tillage systems. Another suggestion to expand its educational efforts. One person who had was that ''cooperators need to provide more visual been out of the U.S. for a number of years noted that examples of their farms, like slides.'' Someone sug- ''as time goes on and more people have trials, PFI will Winter 1991 27 have to look at how to present the results in an under­ 'ldable format.'' This person believes determining .Jw best to disseminate more and more information in an understandable form will be a key task for PA in the future.

Others suggested that PA should work to build membership. Continuing in its activities while working toward growth in its active membership" was how one person put it, and they continued by saying that "getting farmers together will help sort out priorities.'' Another person suggested that PA needed to ''outline its mission and objectives,'' while several others encouraged working with other groups and staying as diverse as possible.

These recommendations are intelligent and useful, and they demonstrate the wisdom and knowledge of PA members. Indeed, the evaluation forms were full of Chief Seattle (Bill Dahl, who farms near Orion, Illinois) insightful comments from people who cared about the provided a stirring conclusion to the winter meeting with his challenge for stewardship. organization and about sustainable agriculture. PA ·.zmbers are hungry for new knowledge and new ideas . . tey are not afraid to give something a try and stick meeting. In response to a final question asking for other with it. They are important resources for agriculture's comments, some of the responses were "keep up the future, and so is the Practical Farmers of Iowa organiza­ good work,'' ''I am glad what I see going on in PFI,'' tion. This was not lost on those attending the annual and "well done!" •

(I) E 8-o. c: 0 ~ 1(3 c .~... Q ::I :;2 0 ~~ :;., lii :t tel ~ 0 "E..Qo_ 0. - it "' 1:: 0 0 ·-Q,. .:2 z ~0 - ~ 8. c: ~ Q,. 0 (I) - .z 1: E 0 \D < e E 1(3 E (I) 0 - M «! <;::::

CORRESPONDENCE PRACTICAL FARMERS 0 F IOWA MEMBERSHIP DISTRICTS Correspondence to the PFI directors' addresses is always welcome. Member contributions to the Pradlrol Farmer are also welcome and will be reviewed by the PFI board of directors.

District 1 (Northwest): Bob Graaf, RR 1, Palmer, 50571. (712) 359-7787.

Associate board member for District 1: Paul Mugge, RR 2, Box 48, Sutherland, 51058. (712) 446-2414.

District 2 (North Central): Allyn Hagensick, RR 4, Box 57, Hampton, 50441. (515) 456-2945. Associate board member for District 2: Dick Thompson, PFI Treasurer, .. RR 2, Box 132, Boone, 50036. (515) 432-1560. .. District 3 (Northeast): Tom Frantzen, PFI President, RR 2, New Hampton, 50659. (515) 364-6426.

District 4 (Southwest): Vic Madsen, PFI Vice President, RR 3, Audubon, 50025. (712) 563-3044. Acknowledgment:

Associate board member for District 5: Jeff Olson, RR 2, Box 147, The Pradiro/ Farmer and the PFI on-farrn demonstrations are supported, in part, by Iowa State University Cooperative Extension Winfield, 52659. (319) 257-6967. and the Integrated Farrn Management Demonstration Program of the Agricultural Energy Managemenl Fund, State of Iowa, through the Coordinators: Rick Exner, Gary Huber, Room 2104, Agronomy Hall, ISU, Iowa Department of Agriculture and Land Stewardship, with Ames, Iowa, 50011. (515) 294-1923. appropriations from the Iowa Groundwater Protection Fund. Public Relations Coordinator: Maria Vakulskas Rosmann, RR 1, Box 177, Harlan, 51537. (712) 627-4653.

Practical Farmers of Iowa Rt. 2, Box 132, Boone, Iowa 50036

Forwarding and Return Postage Guaranteed Address Correction Requested

-~